SebastianP Posted October 22, 2007 Share Posted October 22, 2007 Would the turret idea be OK if it wasn't the pilot/copilot that was operating it? I can totally see the crew chief sitting at a gunner's console and drawing areas with a trackball over the places where he wants to lay down suppressive fire, or point out targets he wants the gun to track and eliminate. The US Army has more or less abandoned the idea of exposed gunners on land vehicles in favor of remotely operated turrets... SP Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tank Posted October 22, 2007 Share Posted October 22, 2007 How do you break it to a guy that even if its possible to come back to -46s, you're just going to wind right back in a -22? It's not like they (Boeing) are churning out new -46s, are they? Sal and Jon make some very good points, especially about keeping the drivers focused on driving and not going for the high score on Halo 3 while the grunts go down the rope/out the ramp. I'll just keep playing with my models and arming and marking them in all kinds of interesting ways...who knows, maybe I'll get a job offer from Boeing to design an escort when I hang up the tree suit for good? When talking at a young LT with VMM-162, he spoke of the Crew Chief/AO operating the gun and not the drivers. So from that stance I could see where adding a gun wouldn't be an issue. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
phantom Posted October 22, 2007 Share Posted October 22, 2007 How about belly mounted turreted fricken lazer beams? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
LanceB Posted October 22, 2007 Share Posted October 22, 2007 (edited) How do you break it to a guy that even if its possible to come back to -46s, you're just going to wind right back in a -22? It's not like they (Boeing) are churning out new -46s, are they? Yup. You know, I was thinking I've heard this exact same discussion/attitude over 20 years ago. A-4 drivers b****ing about "being made to fly Harriers". "It's unsafe" or "it's not the plane we need" or "it will never replace the A-4". Some pilots left active duty and went Reserve so they could keep flying A-4s. Guess what they were flying just a few years later? Nothing. And the view of the higher-ups was well summed up by our CO, who transitioned into Harriers from F-4s when VMFA-542 became VMA-542 many years earlier: "This is the program. Get with it. Don't like it? Then we don't need you anyway." Edited October 22, 2007 by LanceB Quote Link to post Share on other sites
LemonJello Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 How about belly mounted turreted fricken lazer beams? Those are all being used by the Navy...they're strapping them to sharks' heads for ASW purposes. Budgets are tight what with the war going on and all... We did get a nice deal on some ill tempered sea bass, though. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Trigger Posted October 23, 2007 Share Posted October 23, 2007 Those are all being used by the Navy...they're strapping them to sharks' heads for ASW purposes. So that's what replaced the AIM-54! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
richuk Posted October 24, 2007 Author Share Posted October 24, 2007 Many thanks for your responses. The -22 is obviously a very contentious issue. Only time will tell whether it will prove the critics right or wrong. Hopefully the latter. Good luck to the crews being deployed to Iraq. Rich Quote Link to post Share on other sites
SSgtd6152 Posted October 24, 2007 Share Posted October 24, 2007 Amen.People can b!tch as much as they want about leaving, but the green machine will continue to roll on without them. There's plenty of hard-charging Marines to make the program work. Hmmm............. I do not see you jumping to the head of the line to fly in it!!!!!!!!..... :wub: If I was not a SNCO I'll do a lap move but I can't..............now can I... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
LemonJello Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 D, depending on the MOS, you should still be able to lat move...When I switched from 0311 to 4066 back in 99, there were 5 SSgts, 3 other Sgts besides me and a Cpl in a class with 20 PFCs! So it can be done. And now, with the Corps' expansion it may be even easier to do. I'd like to get a ride in the -22 some time. That and a Huey are the only 2 battle taxis I haven't ridden in yet. Oh, and the EFV if it ever gets into service. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
LanceB Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 I'd like to get a ride in the -22 some time. That and a Huey are the only 2 battle taxis I haven't ridden in yet. Going off-topic, but you'd like a Huey ride. I guarantee it. It's like riding in a sports coupe compared to Eggbeaters and Sh*tters. You don't get vibrated to death like in an Eggbeater, and you don't get nauseous from hours of breathing exhaust fumes like you do in a Sh*tter. Then again, on takeoff you don't get the same sensation of being lifted up by something with an ungodly amount of raw power like you do on a 53E. But it is still a very nice ride, and I'd imagine some of that "power" feeling would be noticable on the Y Huey, once it hits the Fleet. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
SSgtd6152 Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 D, depending on the MOS, you should still be able to lat move...When I switched from 0311 to 4066 back in 99, there were 5 SSgts, 3 other Sgts besides me and a Cpl in a class with 20 PFCs! So it can be done. And now, with the Corps' expansion it may be even easier to do. I'd like to get a ride in the -22 some time. That and a Huey are the only 2 battle taxis I haven't ridden in yet. Oh, and the EFV if it ever gets into service. No, I looked in to it about six weeks ago, I was told if you like to change MOS the only thing I can move to is V-22 or 8411 F-that. It sucks...........I'm going to be at 13 years at my EAS. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
LemonJello Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 No, I looked in to it about six weeks ago, I was told if you like to change MOS the only thing I can move to is V-22 or 8411 F-that. It sucks...........I'm going to be at 13 years at my EAS. Dang. That does suck. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
SSgtd6152 Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 Yep............ Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Matt_S Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 If I was not a SNCO I'll do a lap move Sounds like a bad visual to me. :D Matt Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tank Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 No, I looked in to it about six weeks ago, I was told if you like to change MOS the only thing I can move to is V-22 or 8411 F-that. It sucks...........I'm going to be at 13 years at my EAS. Did they change the rules about doing a B billet, otherwise you would have had that decision coming anyways. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
SSgtd6152 Posted October 25, 2007 Share Posted October 25, 2007 (edited) Did they change the rules about doing a B billet, otherwise you would have had that decision coming anyways. No, The rules are the same, I've been on the hit list 2 times and my monitor would not release me and my name has not made it back on the list. Thank God!!!! I only know one guy from my MOS that has had to hit the streets. The poor guy was in Oakland :unsure: .......... Odd, I just talked to him today he is checking in to 163. Edited October 25, 2007 by SSgtd6152 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
CrewChief53 Posted November 3, 2007 Share Posted November 3, 2007 Hey- The proposed nose turret was a GAU-19 with +/-100 degrees of ARC. But everything looks good on paper, so who know what it could really do. As I understand the CV-22 folks are undecided about what to pursue, they may bring back the nose turret. Phil The V-22 in any variation has entirely too many weight issues, as is. Don't expect to ever see a turret, no matter where it is located. As for actual armament... ask the Marines. They're the ones that decided to use a 4 ship formation to have enough fire power to compete with what an H-53E or MH-53M can put down by itself. So.... instead of a single ship (or 2 ship) formation, they are sending 4!!!! in to do the same job. The M240 is a great weapon, but NOT for aircraft. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Icchan Posted November 3, 2007 Share Posted November 3, 2007 Somewhat on-topic, dealing with the issues of weapons aboard the V-22, but there's one major thing to consider about all the various gunships and support craft and such. The cabin walls of the Osprey are load bearing structures. That means if you cut holes in it, you begin compromising the airframe, which is why noone's even entertaining such notions beyond things like door guns and that drop-down belly turret. And yes, airframe integrity risks compromise with damage as well. Source on that is from here: http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/v-22-o...ame-03930/#more so I can't say anything as to the veracity of the report, but...I doubt there'll ever be a proper gunship of the Osprey. A shame... And if anyone has better data, or more knowledge about such a thing, PLEASE feel free to correct me - I'm no expert, I'm just passing along something I found, is all. Personally, I'd LOVE to see a Spooky-type Osprey to support a troop plane, it'd make a nice little baby-Spectre. And for a modeling project that's unrelated to the Osprey, though uses a similar sized aircraft, just what WOULD you put into the side of an AV-22? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
SebastianP Posted November 3, 2007 Share Posted November 3, 2007 Seriously? I'd stick with relatively low-recoil weapons - no big autocannon or anything. Miniguns, even the GAU-19 are OK, I think. To back them up, some XM307s (I love that weapon, wish they'd get it done soon...) For really hard targets, a breech-loading 60 (or 81!) mm mortar - I don't know if one exists, but they do make several varieties of 120 mm autoloading mortars with stabilizing systems for firing on the move, so it's not impossible that you could design one in the smaller caliber. SP (I keep seeing a light prop transport of some sort with a 120 mm mortar tube sticking out the roof, sort of like on the M113 mortar carriers. Airborne indirect fire support! SP Quote Link to post Share on other sites
LemonJello Posted November 3, 2007 Share Posted November 3, 2007 And for a modeling project that's unrelated to the Osprey, though uses a similar sized aircraft, just what WOULD you put into the side of an AV-22?Hmmm, let's see: I went with 2 7.62 miniguns, 2 25mm bushmasters and a 40mm Bofors-type cannon. All the flexible ammo feeds and cans of rounds make for one crowded cabin. I've just got to get her painted and maybe pick up some decals to mark it and I'll have it done. Soon as I get something to show, I'll post pics. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.